Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You ignored that I have proven that the First Nations people certainly DID have a concept of tribal territory, and many the concept of private property.
You ignored that to spout and repeat the lie why?
"Native Americans believe they are closely linked with the land and everything that grows on the land or lives on the land. Because of this belief, the idea of "owning" land did not exist among the Native Americans".
Really? Then why did both the US and Canada sign treaties with First Nations?
They didn't have to anymore than they had to pay Mexico for lands they acquired through a war. Probably some kind of peace offering. I can't speak for what dead people did long ago.
Once again, listen up. The ones who didn't present themselves at the border and instead sneaked in are NOT asylum seekers. Why are you having trouble understanding that?
You have NO basis for making that assertion. There is a procedure in place that will determine whether or not the claim can be upheld, but you, and many like you, apparently do not want to follow the procedure that is mandated by law and treaty.
Now, WHY? Answer that. WHY do you want to break treaties and ignore your own laws? WHY?
Quote:
So...on a per capita basis Canada takes in more? Well good for your country. Keep it up.
How many per year do you expect the US to take in legally? 2 million? 5 million? 10 million?
It depends. With the number of employers having trouble filling jobs, often because of an aging society, maybe 5 million is the right number. I can't judge that, but I do know that my business contacts in the US are having trouble filling jobs, and even though they are looking at more automation, many of these jobs can't be done by automation. The US economy, just like Canada's depends on immigration because both of our country's birth rate has fallen to the point where it is hurting the economy. You DO understand that this is a real issue, I hope, don't you?
Quote:
Why do you even care? You just winter here. It must be so horrible for you to winter here since you seem to hate the US.
My place in Florida is in the middle of the red area, and almost all my neighbors are Republicans. They can't believe what is happening with their country. It is not what they voted for. Regardless of their politics, they to a person are great people, in fact, those that are there year round, have a key to my place just in case of, you know, hurricanes, or water leaks, or whatever.
Quote:
"Fox News propaganda addicts"? Oh, you poor thing! You are so very, very wrong. I don't watch Fox all day. You think that if someone doesn't think like you then they all are "Fox News addicts". Stereotype much, do you? How narrow-minded of you.
Oh good. Do you obtain a multi-channel perspective? Al-Jazeera? BBC? New York Times? The despicable (and I am not joking, can't stand her) Rachel Maddow? Financial Times? Bloomberg? CNN (yes, they do have some good reporting)? How about the English version of Der Spiegel? Frankfurter Allgemeine? Do you question claims made in opinion editorials, fact check them or just accept them when they agree with your confirmation bias?
Quote:
It's not a "false equivalency". You are just uncomfortable with the truth---and the truth is that those who are sneaking across the border could well be trafficking minors.
Again---are you a parent? If so, how would you feel if someone kidnapped your child and trafficked him/her across a border? Even worse, how would you feel if a BP agent didn't question the trafficker and allowed the trafficker to keep your child?
You're scaremongering. Does it happen? Yes. Is it the primary source? Not even close. Quit beating that drum.
Quote:
Again---why haven't you gone to the border and offered to take in some of these so-called asylum seekers? You whine about their predicament but refuse to do anything about it. At least many who are misguided like you did put their money where their mouths are and did show up at the border to take in these people. It's long past time for you to stop talking the talk and start walking the walk.
The USA won't let anyone do that. You know that, don't you?
Quote:
You've yet to answer any of the above questions. Apparently, these questions make you squirm. So, if I had to place a bet, I would bet that you will continue to ignore them. That says a lot about you.
"Native Americans believe they are closely linked with the land and everything that grows on the land or lives on the land. Because of this belief, the idea of "owning" land did not exist among the Native Americans".
They didn't have to anymore than they had to pay Mexico for lands they acquired through a war. Probably some kind of peace offering. I can't speak for what dead people did long ago.
Oh good. So the Constitution that POTUS swore to uphold means what? After all, long ago dead people wrote it.
Read and learn. Learning takes away igorances every single time.
Hilarious! Your first link describes what a legitimate asylum seeker is. How many from south of our border fit the criteria? I would say hardly any of them and the Border Patrol knows it. Therefore we are not denying legitimate asylum seekers entry into our country. Yes, learn and dispel your own ignorance.
Article 1 of the Convention, as amended by the 1967 Protocol, defines a refugee as this:
A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.
Hilarious! Your first link describes what a legitimate asylum seeker is. How many from south of our border fit the criteria? I would say hardly any of them and the Border Patrol knows it. Therefore we are not denying legitimate asylum seekers entry into our country. Yes, learn and dispel your own ignorance.
Article 1 of the Convention, as amended by the 1967 Protocol, defines a refugee as this:
A person who owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it.
What you missed is what is required of the country that the asylum seeker asks for that asylum. Those asylum seekers have rights, rights that presently the USA is not adhering to.
Who's not upholding the Constitution? Where in the Constitution does it address bogus asylum seekers?
What is it about due process you object to?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
